, 1887-04-21

WASHINGTON, April 1S.-The su.
preme court to-day delivered its opin.
ion in the famous Maxwell land grant
case, which was brought before it on
an appeal from the circuit court OF the
District Of Columbia. The decision OF
the lower court dismissed bill
brought by the United States against
the Maxwell land grant company, the
Denver & Rio Grande railroad com.
pany, the Pueblo & Arkansas Valley
railroad company and the Atchison
Topeka & Santa Fe railroad company
The bill was brought for the purpose
of setting aside q patent granting To
parties the Beahlen and Gautla.
aloupe Miranda tract, described in a
very extensive survey, conveying
1,714,164 acres in New Mexico and
Colorado. The bill assailed the grant
mainly upon the ground that the pat
ent was secured upon false representa-
tions OF defendants. 1t conceded the
validity OF the original grant by Mex.
leo, but charged conspiracy and fraud
in the survey, by which means the
patent was made to cover 265 600
acres more than the original grant
comprehended. The question of fraud
in the survey, the court says, (Which
is about all there is Of actual fraud in
the title OF ofdefendants," is not deserving
of much consideration. We are COM
PEELED to say that we do not see any
satisfactory evidence Of an attempt to
commit fraud, and still less of its con-
summation. AS to the principal
officers of the government who were
connected with that survey, to wit !:
The commissioner of the general land
office and the encouragement of the
territory of New Mexico, there is not
the slightest evidence that they were
governed by any fraudulent or i'm
proper motives in their acts in regard
to this survey, or that they displayed
any leaning toward the grantees i'm
ascertaining the true boundaries of
the grant, nor is there any serious
attack upon the subordinates of those
officers who were actually engaged in
making the survey in regard to their
honesty OF purpose or interest in the
result. We take the general doctrine
to be that when in court
of equity it is proposed to
set aside, to annul, or correct q writ
ten instrument under seal for fraud or
in execution OF the instru-
ment itself, the testimony on which
this is done must be clear, unequivo-
cal and convincing, and this cannot
be done upon bare preponderance of
evidence which leaves the issue in
doubt. If the proposition as thus laid
down in the case just cited, is sound
in regard to ordinary contracts OF pri-
vate individuals, how much more
should it be observed when an attempt
is made to annul grants, patents and
other solemn evidences of title emf
mating from the government of the
United States under its official seal.
In this class Of cases respect due to
patent is prescription that all pre-.
ceeding steps required by law had
been observed before its issue. The
importance and necessity of
the stability of titles dependent upon
these official instruments demand that
an effort to set them aside, to annul
them, or to correct mistakes in them
should only be successful
when the allegations on which
this is attempted an clearly stated and
fully sustained by proof. 1t is not ad-
mitted that titles by which so much
property in this country and so many
rights are held, purporting to emenate
from authoritative action of officers of
the government, and as in this case
under the seal and signature of the
United States itself, shall be de-
pendent upon the hazard OF success
full resistance to every whim and cap
rice of any person who chooses to at
tack them in u court of justice, but it
would be well understood that only
that class of evidence which commands
respect and that the amount OF it
which produces conviction shall make
such an attempt successful. In regard
to questions concerning surveys, as to
their conformity to original Mexican
grant and frauds, which are asserted
to have had the same influence in
making of these surveys so far from
their being established by that satis-
factory and convincing evidence which
we have laid down requires, we are of
the opinion that if it were an open
question, unaffected by the respect
due to the official acts of the govern
ment upon such subject as we'll as
sanction OF patent issued upon, these
surveys depending upon bare pre-
ponderance of evidence, there is an
utter failure to establish mistakes on
fraud. For these reasons the decree
OF the circuit court is affirmed.